Rajendran v. The Superintendent Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 06.09.2022
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP CRL.O.P(MD)No.15650 of 2022 Rajendran
...Petitioner
vs 1.The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District, Dindigul.
2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ottanchatram, Dindigul District.
3.The Inspector of Police, Ottanchatram Police Station, Dindigul District. 4.The Sub Inspector of Police, Reddiyarchathiram Police Station, Dindigul District.
5.Gurusamy 6.Gunasekaran
...Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, praying to direct the fourth respondent not to interfere with the civil dispute between the petitioner and the fifth and sixth respondent under the guise of any enquiry or any Kattapanchayat (Kangaroo Court).
1/5
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Muniyandi For R1 to R4 : Mr.A.Albert James Government Advocate ****
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition is filed to direct the fourth Respondent not to interfere with the civil dispute between the Petitioner, the fifth and sixth Respondent under the guise of any enquiry or any Kattapanchayat (Kangaroo Court). 2.Heard Mr.S.Muniyandi, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Mr.A.Albert James, learned Government Advocate, who takes notice on behalf of R1 to R4.
3.It is the submission of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner was granted land in S.No.390/2A in Alagupatti Village, Dindigul Taluk, Dindigul District, which is an agricultural land, which was allotted to him under Bhoomi Than Scheme vide proceedings in Na.Ka.No.23/2000.
The Petitioner had been cultivating in the land and he had remitted the tax to the Government till date. The revenue records standing in the name of the Petitioner, as he is the Cultivating Tenant. The fifth and sixth Respondents are 2/5
demanding the land. They had preferred a complaint with the fourth Respondent. Based on the complaint of the fifth and sixth Respondents, the fourth respondent had been causing harassment to the Petitioner by summoning him quite often. Therefore, the Petitioner has approached this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeking direction from this Court to direct the Respondents 1 to 4 not to cause harassment.
4.The learned Government Advocate, on instructions, would submit that based on the complaint given by the fifth and sixth Respondents, the fourth Respondent had summoned the Petitioner as well as the fifth and sixth Respondents and conducted an enquiry and closed the enquiry as civil dispute.
5.Recording the submission of the learned Government Advocate, this Petition is closed.
06.09.2022 Index:Yes/no cmr 3/5
To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District, Dindigul.
2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ottanchatram, Dindigul District.
3.The Inspector of Police, Ottanchatram Police Station, Dindigul District. 4.The Sub Inspector of Police, Reddiyarchathiram Police Station, Dindigul District.
4/5
SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP , J.
cmr CRL.O.P(MD)No.15650 of 2022 06.09.2022 5/5